Micro Seiki, or TW AC-1

10-22-12: Thuchan
Pcosta,
I never made any negative remarks about the TW designs. I know Thomas Woschnik from the very first beginning he started with his first tables in Germany and I also followed the successful landing in the US market by the activity of Joe Catalano.

Has anyone ask Thomas Woschnik what he thinks is the best turntable?

Thuchan is right about neither table being a 'plug & play'.
With the Raven in particular........I have found that its sound can change depending on how it is supported?
If it sits on a stand located on a suspended wood floor.......it can be susceptible to structure-borne feedback, and sound slow and bloated as some have described.
Even on a concrete floor....if that floor is suspended and not 'on-ground'....again the structure-borne feedback can be intrusive.
Once mounted on a wall-hung shelf (or Minus K stand)....the table can be delicate and nimble.
With most mats I have heard......the sound can sometimes feel compressed and unexciting?
Placing the record directly on the copper platter together with a heavy weight will improve the apparent 'speed' and 'colour' of the sound.
Thuchan is also right about the three motors.
With the Timeline.......the constancy of speed via the 3 motors is inferior to that with only 2 diametrically opposed motors.
The speed constancy will never match that of a fine DD deck like my Victor TT-101 and I have tried many different 'belts'.....from various silk threads to Dertonarm's 'magic' string.
The Ravens however are designed with a Delcrin platter which requires the rough side of the rubber belt to actually 'grip'...to maintain its speed control.
The strings and threads just 'slip' too much.
When the Raven has been 'tweeked' to sound its best......if can sound surprisingly similar to my TT-101......perhaps the most neutral and accurate deck I have ever heard?

Albert , I did many times, but I will keep these personal discussions with me.
Halcro, Agree - you can make the TW sound very good.

In all fairness I have to note, that I like Albert's Technics with SME 312 S and Dynavector XV-1S.
As I've mentioned in my original post, I just want to try different design approach.
In the mean time, I'm focused on optimizing my room.
I have two JL Audio F112 subs on order, and then Steve of Synergy Audio& Video will be over to optimize the setup.
He's confident, we will be able to get rid of the residual room- related LF issues, improving bass performance at the same time.

Dear Maril555: Active subwoofers connected in true stereo fashion always are welcome in almost any audio system.

Thinking in " high voice " and if I was you I will connect those subwoofers running and crossing at around 80hz and the Duo subs running from 80 hz and up.
Now, if those JL are/have and can handle/run with high quality performance up to 170hz then I will by-pass the Duo subs. Normally good subs performs very well up to 100hz and maybe to run the JLs up to 170hz could be not very good idea. You have to check/test listen both options and decide.

IMHO the main target to achieve with active subs is not only better bass management but to achieve better mid-bass/mid-range and HF range. To achieve those targets the crossover frequency on the subs and the satellite is extremely critical as is to set up the right subs SPL in a way that the integartion be absolutely seamless/transparent where the subs appears only when the recording is asking for. This overall job take time and I mean time : not hours but several days and even weeks to be exactly " there ".

Only an opinion.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.